Jose Alvarez-Madrigal, Dolores Madrigal De Alvarez, and Uriel Alvarez-Madrigal v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Good Law
808 F.2d 705·1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 1422
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 20, 198785-7533California927 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beezer, J.

Jose Alvarez-Madrigal, his wife Dolores Madrigal de Alvarez and his son Uriel Alvarez-Madrigal (petitioners) seek review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision denying their application for suspension of deportation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to section 106 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), and we deny the petition for review.

Petitioners are natives and citizens of Mexico who entered this country without inspection in 1974. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) commenced deportation proceedings in 1981. Petitioners conceded deportability at the deportation hearing, but applied for suspension of deportation pursuant to section 244(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (a)(1). The Immigration Judge denied the application and allowed petitioners thirty days for voluntary departure. The BIA affirmed.

We granted review and reversed the BIA on the ground that it had abused its discretion by failing to show that it had considered all the petitioners’ claims in support of their application for suspension, 746 F.2d 1484 . In particular, the BIA had not mentioned the petitioners’ claims of hardship due to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.